Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

The official English translation of the article reads:
“ARTICLE 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.(2) To accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.

Also something possibly useful from the San Francisco Treaty for the present day disputes, though I doubt China would go for it.

Quote:

CHAPTER VI SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES

Article 22

If in the opinion of any Party to the present Treaty there has arisen a dispute concerning the interpretation or execution of the Treaty, which is not settled by reference to a special claims tribunal or by other agreed means, the dispute shall, at the request of any party thereto, be referred for decision to the International Court of Justice. Japan and those Allied Powers which are not already parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice will deposit with the Registrar of the Court, at the time of their respective ratifications of the present Treaty, and in conformity with the resolution of the United Nations Security Council, dated 15 October 1946, a general declaration accepting the jurisdiction, without special agreement, of the Court generally in respect to all disputes of the character referred to in this Article.

UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - China's Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi sparked angry exchanges with Japanese diplomats at the United Nations by accusing Japan of stealing disputed islands.

Chinese and Japanese envoys on Thursday staged a series of attacks after Yang heightened tensions over the East China Sea islands and reopened old diplomatic wounds over World War II.

The Japanese government's purchase of the uninhabited islands from a private owner this month has infuriated Beijing and set off violent protests in several Chinese cities.

"China strongly urges Japan to immediately stop all activities that violate China's territorial sovereignty, take concrete actions to correct its mistakes and return to the track of resolving the dispute through negotiation," Yang told the UN assembly.

China has demanded the return of the uninhabited islands, known as the Diaoyu in Chinese and the Senkaku in Japanese, for decades. Taiwan also claims the islands.

Yang reaffirmed his country's historical claim that Japan tricked China into signing a treaty ceding the islands in 1895. Japan states that the islands were legally incorporated into its territory.

"The moves taken by Japan are totally illegal and invalid. They can in no way change the historical fact that Japan stole Diaoyu and its affiliated islands from China and the fact that China has territorial sovereignty over them," said the Chinese minister.

Japan's move was in "outright denial" of its defeat in World War II, he added, reaffirming China's repeated references to the 1939-45 war.

Yang and Japan's Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba held stern talks on the dispute in New York on Tuesday, and Yang's speech sparked sharp exchanges between Japanese and Chinese diplomats as each sought a right of reply.

Insisting that Japan legally incorporated the islands into its territory in 1895, Japan's deputy UN ambassador Kazuo Kodama said that "an assertion that Japan took the islands from China cannot logically stand."

Kodama added that the references to World War II were "unconvincing and unproductive."

China's UN envoy Li Baodong responded that "the Japanese delegate once again brazenly distorted history, resorting to spurious fallacious arguments that defy all reason and logic to justify their aggression of Chinese territory."

"The Japanese government still clings to its obsolete colonial mindset," Li added. "China is capable of safeguarding the integrity of its territory," the ambassador warned.

When Kodama responded that the islands "are clearly an inherent territory of Japan," Li returned to the attack. He said his Japanese counterpart "feels no guilt for Japan's history of aggression and colonialism."
The Japanese government's purchase of the islands is based purely on "the logic of robbers," he stormed.

Even if, and that's a huuuuge "if", Qing Dynasty legally owned the islands..... do they not realize People's Republic of China ain't the same nation as the Qing Dynasty, which actually was destroyed by.... OH YEAH, the government before the PRC. lol.

Not an argument that is going to work. PRC proclaims it is a successor state to the regimes of the past, thus being the heir to all the territories of the Qing unless specifically settled (such as Mongolia, Russia).

I ultimately blame that racist hypocrite Sun Yat-sen for giving the "legitimacy" to the claim to the territories of the Qing.

It's kinda annoying too, considering they put so much effort into destroying what was left of the Qing Dynasty, along with much of the traditional culture.
Saying they're the successor to something they destroy and abused is like rubbing salt in the wounds.

Again, it stems from Sun Yat-sen, who said that the Han Chinese should chase out and kill the "Tatars" yet after the revolution advocated the notion China is comprised of different groups (of each the "Tatars" are included) because of the land/resources those non-Han ethnic groups have. Basically, it is ideological hypocrisy at its finest, turning nationalism into imperialism.

Even if, and that's a huuuuge "if", Qing Dynasty legally owned the islands..... do they not realize People's Republic of China ain't the same nation as the Qing Dynasty, which actually was destroyed by.... OH YEAH, the government before the PRC. lol.

Oh hey, be right back, I think Tibet wants to tell me something.

I think any new government that overthrows the previous one in an internal conflict is naturally regarded as the natural successor. The country does not lose any claim to any of its territory that way.

Whether the islands were part of Qing Dynasty is up for debate.

Quote:

It's kinda annoying too, considering they put so much effort into destroying what was left of the Qing Dynasty, along with much of the traditional culture.
Saying they're the successor to something they destroy and abused is like rubbing salt in the wounds.

The root of the destruction was really the foreign invasions near end of Qing Dynasty. The pride of Chinese people was largely shattered by a series of humilations. Is it really a surprise that they did not treasure the legacy of a dynasty that most saw as outdated and useless, and replaced it with a new ideology like Communism?

Oh we inherited this.
Oh we're different, we don't inherit such old crap.

Besides, respect for old culture and tradition can coexist with modern society, many places do including Japan and much of Europe.
Unfortunately, Communism isn't as compatible as republics on the matter.

That government that fled to Taiwan should have been the new China, not the PRC.

Until the early 1970s, Taiwan "was" the new China...at least as far as the UN, the US and its allies were concerned. By the 70s (and the Vietnam War) it was clear that the PRC was a viable force with nuclear weapons. Also it had done two things. One is aid the North Vietnamese against the South Vietnamese and American forces. And two is was in a border dispute with the Soviet Union.

While the aid to the NVA hurt and killed a bunch of American soldiers and sailors, the border dispute with the Soviet was "too good" to pass up. It would put a wedge in the Soviet Bloc by keeping the Soviets and Chinese enemies rather than allies. So Nixon went to China. Taiwan was not exactly thrown under the bus, as they still got mountains of aid and military hardware from the Americans to ensure their unofficial independance. but the PRC was now China to the world.

As for the Chinese claim. I don't buy it. In what way were they tricked into giving up those islands (or having them "stolen")? Wasn't that when Formosa was signed over to Japan? So either way the islands would have gone over. That they changed what location administered those islands is an entirely different matter. One that changes who considers it what and where. By the time the Americans came, a generation or two later, they were considered part of the area administered by Okinawa, thus that is were it went by treaty.

Unless someone decides to change that, those islands belong to Japan.

And yes I am quite aware that the Chinese treaty with Japan was to make all their agreements and treaties void as least as far back as 1895. The basic problem was that none of those treaties change the administratio of those islands...that was internal (no idea why they changed it to Okinawa over Formosa. Maybe it had something to do with the shortlived Republic of Formosa that resisted the Japanese for a few months in 1895 after the treaty with China was signed).

It goes back to the basic problem of "Was Senkaku ever part of Qing?." Technically from Japan's point of view, it was never really part of Taiwan and thus was either Terra nullius or an incorporated territory which was fundamentally a part of Ryukyus that should have gone to Japan during the Ryukyu annexation.

That government that fled to Taiwan should have been the new China, not the PRC.

I am against that. The over-liberal aspect of adopting cultures can be destructive to the mental health of the youth!

Have you read their BL doujins? Pretty boys with girlishly big eyes being under slender handsome ones with perverted narrow eyes.......AND IT IS WRITTEN IN CHINESE. And the artist is MALE.

Back on topic, I think I have to agree with Ascaloth on this. Given control of such a huge swath of land and manpower, they can easily create a Chinese Hegemony all over East Asia and Europe instead of just staying put and "let everyone else around us kill each other".

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

I am against that. The over-liberal aspect of adopting cultures can be destructive to the mental health of the youth!

Have you read their BL doujins? Pretty boys with girlishly big eyes being under slender handsome ones with perverted narrow eyes.......AND IT IS WRITTEN IN CHINESE. And the artist is MALE.

You know, that only exists because Taiwan was not part of some Sinocentric Empire and thus was open towards Japan, which had brought it wealth during the occupation. Talk about the legacy of imperialism.

You know, that only exists because Taiwan was not part of some Sinocentric Empire and thus was open towards Japan, which had brought it wealth during the occupation. Talk about the legacy of imperialism.

Speaking of which, the general otaku of each region doesn't exactly seem to really care about the political bickering on the islands. Their discussions are still centered around "when will the next episode be released" and "can you pirates in mainland hurry up with the upload we are waiting to upload our TL".

Screw Japanese imperialism and Sinocentric empires. Let the otaku rule the EA.

__________________

When three puppygirls named after pastries are on top of each other, it is called Eclair a'la menthe et Biscotti aux fraises avec beaucoup de Ricotta sur le dessus.
Most of all, you have to be disciplined and you have to save, even if you hate our current financial system. Because if you don't save, then you're guaranteed to end up with nothing.

Lots of old wounds have reopened. Most of them to people that were not alive, or where very young back then. There are Americans with wounds that deep and they shout out every once in a while. But we don't have any territorial disputes with Japan over anything that was ours. We have some disputes over out bases being their still, but given the saber rattling China is doing and the North Koreans lobbing a rocket over the area every few years, they tend to want to keep us around...if only to know that someone will try to stop the invaders if that ever happen.

It might be irony if the next time China decides to invade Japan, it is the United States that is the Divine Wind.

Lots of old wounds have reopened. Most of them to people that were not alive, or where very young back then. There are Americans with wounds that deep and they shout out every once in a while. But we don't have any territorial disputes with Japan over anything that was ours. We have some disputes over out bases being their still, but given the saber rattling China is doing and the North Koreans lobbing a rocket over the area every few years, they tend to want to keep us around...if only to know that someone will try to stop the invaders if that ever happen.

It might be irony if the next time China decides to invade Japan, it is the United States that is the Divine Wind.

Indeed. When looking at it, the PRC and North Korea are just asking to get their asses whipped with the consistent trolling they are doing in the last few years. Try guessing what is Hu Jintao's mental state, but he's not far from being a psychiatric case reminiscent of Wilhelm II's illusions of grandeur, impulsiveness and recklessness if the current responses matches his own decisions.

About a Divine Wind... You know what they say? Things always happen in threes.

Try guessing what is Hu Jintao's mental state, but he's not far from being a psychiatric case reminiscent of Wilhelm II's illusions of grandeur, impulsiveness and recklessness if the current responses matches his own decisions.

As much as I want to see PRC destroyed and China splintered into a couple pieces, I do have to disagree with your assessment. PRC is being very pragmatic and realistic with what it's doing, as much as Iran's nuclear program is based on realpolitik.